Patrick Reed vs. the Rules of Golf

[No Mulligans]

Seeing Rory's similar situation, I have to change my position. 

I now think it's possible that a ball can embed in the rough after a bounce.

Faldo said he's never seen it. I suppose now he has. 

 

[Bonvivant]

Just now, DaveP043 said:

So your opinion is that Reed, with a camera just a few feet away, somehow manufactured an embedded lie before calling for the official?

Simply, yes.

[iacas]

48 minutes ago, Shorty said:

“After the round, lead PGA Tour Senior Tournament Official John Mutch reviewed the videotape with Reed and playing parners Will Gordon and Robby Shelton, and he determined that Reed handled the situation properly, including asking a volunteer if the ball had bounced and notifiying his playing partners that he believed he had an embedded ball. Mutch said in an interview with reporters that Reed was entitled to determine if his ball was embedded without the help of a rules official.

You didn't do as asked. You don't know what was actually said to Reed.

43 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Im not accusing him of a rules violation, I’m accusing him of being an em effing cheater.

With what actual evidence?

42 minutes ago, woodzie264 said:

quoting an article which gives an account of what was determined is not the same thing as quoting was was actually said

Yep.

39 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Another point to add to the fishiness of his timing of the asking of the “did it bounce” question was this ... he pulled the tee from his pocket for marking his ball as he was taking his last stride to his ball still before he even could’ve seen his lie.

He clearly intended on marking and lifting his ball even before he could have possibly seen the lie.

So? This is only "fishy" because it's Patrick.

If I hit a ball toward a soft fairway and it doesn't bounce, I assume it may have plugged.

29 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

Once the volunteer said the ball didn't bounce, coupled with getting the same info from playing partners, it was pretty logical to think that the ball was likely to be embedded.

Bingo.

28 minutes ago, Shorty said:

I'd love to know what I've missed that would suggest that his actions were "perfect".

Answer this, @Shorty: what made his actions less than "perfect" within the Rules of Golf?

28 minutes ago, Shorty said:

That's all I'm saying.

That's a gag! 🙂

25 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Also, Rory had a very similar situation on 18 and Rory didn't even call in a rules official. He just took his drop. He notified his opponent, and asked him about if it was a club length or nearest point. The opponent didn't even look at the lie. If Rory knew the dropping rule he didn't even need to ask that questions.

Rory cheated! He didn't do it perfectly!

25 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

You don't need to have your opponent confirm a situation. A golfer can do it themselves. You don't need to ask a rule official. Not asking a rules official, or asking a rules official after the fact, is not an admitting guilt. 

How is that shady?

"Because of something that he did in the past" people will say.

25 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

When the ball doesn't bounce, especially from a full shot, I would be pretty certain I am going to find an embedded ball.

Yep. Apparently @Golfingdad doesn't, though? Strange.

19 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

If you want to say that he is not a cheater you are within your right of opinion, but the Kostis interview on NLU last year, the bunker incident, etc. are reasons why others give him no benefit of the doubt.

What did he do to cheat here? That you can even find a shred of actual proof to back?

19 minutes ago, woodzie264 said:

I don’t think you missed anything. The commentators have all admitted this afternoon that the reason Rory’s actions were not under the microscope is simply a matter of character reputation. Both had a ball bounce and we’re reported embedded upon finding them at final resting place, but yet it’s Reed under scrutiny. While I didn’t see where Reed did anything wrong with the information he had at that time, our history does affect our present and he’s “earned” the microscope he’s found himself under.

Yep.

Shady, right @Golfingdad? 🙂

15 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

This assumes that it was actually embedded. You are taking him on his word for this. I don't take Reed on his word. That's the difference of opinion.

Is the RO lying as well?

9 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Shady because he 100% had his mind made up to mark and lift

As would most golfers if their ball didn't bounce (their belief) after a full shot that came down from ~90 feet.

6 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

When it comes to that rough, where you need a spotter to find it, it would be impossible to tell if the ball was embedded with out marking and lifting it.

Yep.

4 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

So your opinion is that Reed, with a camera just a few feet away, somehow manufactured an embedded lie before calling for the official? I ask because unless he did manufacture the lie, the ball really was embedded. Or else the official doesn't understand the criteria for an embedded ball, and so gave an incorrect ruling.

Yep.

4 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

Simply, yes.

With no actual evidence.

Did Rory do the same thing as Reed? With the exception of NOT involving a RO?

[saevel25]

9 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

Simply, yes.

It amazes me that people can have this sort of confirmation about something with such little evidence. 

People don't cheat 100% of the time. Come on. Don't get stuck on this issue. 

Like I mentioned before, you don't need to formulate a concrete opinion on this. It's OK to think that it is possible that he cheated and possible he didn't and I am OK with that. 

[GolfLug]

I also watched and re-watched the incidence a few times. Re thinking my knee jerk.

Few things:

I don't see him asking the volunteer whether it bounced or not as him getting ready to 'set his cheat trap' anymore. He didn't need to and could still have 'set his trap'. As a matter of fact it actually kills intent. If he wanted to outright cheat, he would not take a chance of getting a "yes, it bounced" since he didn't have to. That would have made it difficult for him to cheat. 

I didn't like him fiddling with the hole after removing the ball. A lip could be built up. Bit shady, but not a definitive.

After watching Rory's similar incidence, it seems balls were embedding on the course left and right for anyone hitting in the rough. Still hard to think a bounced ball would drop with a hand toss level force and break ground with thick grass padding, but whatever.

Agreed that bit of a Reed factor bias is at play. 

 

4 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

 

 

Edited January 31, 2021 by GolfLug

[iacas]

9 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

As a matter of fact it actually kills intent. If he wanted to outright cheat, he would not take a chance of getting a "yes, it bounced" since he didn't have to.

Good point. @Golfingdad?

[Bonvivant]

10 minutes ago, iacas said:

What did he do to cheat here? That you can even find a shred of actual proof to back?

We simply don't know if he did or didn't

 

11 minutes ago, iacas said:

Is the RO lying as well?

The RO did all he could. He took PR's word for the fact that his ball was embedded and proceeded from there.

 

11 minutes ago, iacas said:

With no actual evidence.

Did Rory do the same thing as Reed? With the exception of NOT involving a RO?

No evidence at all. It was tampered with before the RO got there, which is within the ROG and I understand that. I just can't trust him with his history.

I do trust Rory, because he has been shown to be trustworthy, though today is odd because I still don't believe that a ball can do what theirs allegedly did in that rough, no matter how wet.

10 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

It amazes me that people can have this sort of confirmation about something with such little evidence. 

My comment was about my opinion, that I find it more likely that he did something outside of the ROG (that we didn't see) rather than his ball embedding after a bounce. Those are the only two things I am going on, and I thought that I had admitted that earlier.

I saw the video. He was crouched over the ball for some seconds (10-15 maybe), then picks the ball up with two fingers as he is calling for a RO, then fully encloses it in his hand before walking a step or two, and then tossing it near the cart path. He waits, then talks to the RO and takes his drop. Nothing in the video proves either way whether his ball was embedded or not other than his word.

We are all entitled to our opinions, and I respect yours, but the probabilities point me in the other direction. That's all it comes down to for me.

7 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

People don't cheat 100% of the time. Come on. Don't get stuck on this issue.

Correct. They usually attempt to cheat when they believe that they can get away with it.

 

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

We simply don't know if he did or didn't

Answer the question, since you're so confident. What did he do to cheat?

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

The RO did all he could. He took PR's word for the fact that his ball was embedded and proceeded from there.

No, that's a lie.

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

No evidence at all.

Then your opinion is 💩.

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

Nothing in the video proves either way whether his ball was embedded or not other than his word.

Do you understand this rule?

[jmanbooyaa]

The thread title could be changed to If you dislike Reed, he must have cheated. 

[Bonvivant]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

Answer the question, since you're so confident. What did he do to cheat?

I believe that he pressed the ball into the soil when checking if it was embedded. Obviously I don't know for sure, but it seems most likely.

 

1 minute ago, iacas said:

No, that's a lie.

I forgot to mention that he checked the spot that Reed had marked...but the above point makes this a non factor. Of course there was a hole.

 

2 minutes ago, iacas said:

Then your opinion is 💩.

On par with Reed's reputation then.

 

2 minutes ago, iacas said:

Do you understand this rule?

You are entitled to 1 club length relief if your ball is embedded in its original mark (you can check this on your own without anyone else, honor system style)? I haven't read the rule completely, but I believe I have the gist.

I'm sure the rule doesn't say that you can embed it with your hand and get free relief.

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

I believe that he pressed the ball into the soil when checking if it was embedded. Obviously I don't know for sure, but it seems most likely.

Based on no actual evidence, so we're clear.

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

I forgot to mention that he checked the spot that Reed had marked...but the above point accusation without any real evidence makes this a non factor. Of course there was a hole.

FTFY.

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

You are entitled to 1 club length relief if your ball is embedded in its original mark (you can check this on your own without anyone else, honor system style)? I haven't read the rule completely, but I believe I have the gist.

You apparently don't think you can check to see if a ball is embedded without the ball there, though?

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

I'm sure the rule doesn't say that you can embed it with your hand and get free relief.

And again, no evidence supports your accusation here. Does it?

Just say no, because that's the truth.

[woodzie264]

4 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

On par with Reed's reputation then.

That actually made me laugh - that was witty

[Double Mocha Man]

3 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

I'm sure the rule doesn't say that you can embed it with your hand and get free relief.

My gut feeling is it's more egregious than that.  I think that between the female volunteer picking up her little white flag and the RO showing up to the vicinity the player chose to show him the hole the ball had been in for a fraction of a second... and get him to put his fingers in it.  Guessing the spot where the ball jumped to and was marked with the white flag maybe had a depression of 1/8 inch.  Maybe enough to get a embedded ball rule but not enough to sink fingers into and claim a "lip".  Sleight of hand... I used to do magic tricks.

[Bonvivant]

21 minutes ago, iacas said:

You apparently don't think you can check to see if a ball is embedded without the ball there, though?

Of course you can't. You can only check to see if A ball WAS embedded if the ball isn't there still. 

 

23 minutes ago, iacas said:

Does it?

No evidence to the contrary either. 

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

Of course you can't. You can only check to see if A ball WAS embedded if the ball isn't there still. 

The fact remains: one of the ways to check to see if you get embedded ball relief is to remove the ball and check the actual surface of the ground, particularly when it's in an area where you can't see the bottom area of the ball.

1 minute ago, Bonvivant said:

No evidence to the contrary either. 

Can't prove a negative like that.

---

Maybe the volunteer stepped on the ball and lied about it not bouncing because she was trying to cover up her mistake.

[DaveP043]

41 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

Nothing in the video proves either way whether his ball was embedded or not other than his word

When a ball breaks the plane of the ground, there is generally a discernable sharp break in the surface, a "lip".  The official felt the lip, he didn't simply accept Reed's judgement.  That doesn't prove Reed didn't manufacture the lie, nothing can prove that.

[Double Mocha Man]

2 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

---

Maybe the volunteer stepped on the ball and lied about it not bouncing because she was trying to cover up her mistake.

I think you're onto something!

Actually, someone should interview her.  I think she didn't see the ball bounce because she didn't see the ball land.  She heard the thud then turned to look in that direction, but the bounce part was already completed.  So her statement was true to her experience. 

But did she wander off after removing her flag?  She could have been an eye witness to possible chicanery.  Based on what a lot of people are thinking she could have said, "Mr. Reed, the ball was over here, not in that hole you have the Rules Official checking."

[DaveP043]

7 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

Based on what a lot of people are thinking she could have said, "Mr. Reed, the ball was over here, not in that hole you have the Rules Official checking

Oy, again with this one.  On the video I see him mark and lift his ball, and set it to the side.  I did NOT see him wandering around probing for random depressions, poking in tees at random to mislead the official who appeared to arrive just a few moments matter being summoned.